With Election Day just less two weeks away and early voting booths opening, issues surrounding the validity of the different ways to vote have arisen.

Greek-American blogger nicegreekboy commented on the electronic voting machines, which have already caused problems in early-voting-state North Carolina:

â€œThese are used in multiple states, and all you seem to ever hear about them are problems. For one thing, computers crash. A lot. And these are some shitty, poorly kept-up computers. For another thing, there are fears that these things are very easy to hackâ€¦since theyâ€™re, you know, computers. Most of all, though, the biggest problems with electronic voting machines are sometimes caused by outside forces. For instance, in North Carolina, the state only offers machines; there are no paper ballots at polling places (thereâ€™s currently a push to get â€œemergency paper ballots,â€ but each polling place likely wonâ€™t get more than a 100). So, theoretically, if a polling place has its voting machines crash, then voters are up shit creek - they simply canâ€™t vote. And if there are only 100 emergency paper ballots, a huge number of people still wonâ€™t get to vote.â€

There were huge questions about the validity of both the 2002 and 2006 midterm elections.

And nothing has changed. As all problems left untended will, it has only gotten worse. There is evidence voting machines were tampered with in the primaries.

So why is everyone assuming the 2008 election will be fair? Iâ€™m still not convinced there will even be a 2008 election in the US. I'm not making a prediction; I'm not in that line of work. But let's put it this way: if the election goes ahead as it's supposed to, I'll be relieved. If it doesn't, I won't be surprised.â€¨

But if it's more expedient for the Cheney junta to hold elections, but keep them rigged, then they will.â€

Fellow Canadian blogger, Paul Bryant, also comments on the U.S. voting system and lists five problems, including: the different ballot systems in each states and that there isnâ€™t an independent voting commission. He writes about the Canadian voting system.

â€œThe United States could learn from the Canadian election system. In Canada Federal elections are run by Elections Canada an independent body that decides on changes to the composition of ridings, how ballots are handled, identification required at the polls, campaign financing rules etc. Elections Canada is non-partisan and reports to Parliament. The Head and Deputy Head of Elections Canada cannot vote or be a member of a political party and are generally well regarded for their neutrality.â€

While, Duncan McFarlane in the UK, writes about the past elections and states that voter irregularities are still considered a conspiracy â€œby most of the media.â€ McFarlane also comments on the distribution of the voting machines.

â€œFewer voting machines were provided in districts with high numbers of low income, black or student (i.e Democrat) voters. In at least one Ohio precinct there were no working machines. Voters were told theyâ€™d be phoned to come back later. They werenâ€™t. In some precincts they were offered provisional ballots â€“ but under Ohio electoral law provisional ballots canâ€™t be counted until 10 days after the election â€“ long after the election had been â€˜calledâ€™ for Bush (38,39,40,41).â€

He then compares the election to the 2004 elections of Ukraine, where it was also suspected of being rigged.

â€œPerhaps its because the rigged results of the Ukrainian elections favoured Russian businesses at the expense of US and EU based ones â€“ the US Presidential election results were those desired by the owners and chief executives of these companies â€“ not least media conglomerates. The media is meant to provide viewers with the facts and let them decide â€“ instead they present viewers and readers with a conclusion thatâ€™s good for business accompanied by as few facts as possible. So much for objectivity.â€

Over in the Philippines, Mike comments on the mailed New York ballots that had â€œOsamaâ€ on the ballot instead of â€œObama.â€

â€œIt is inexplicable for some that Osama Bin Laden, one of the worldâ€™s most wanted terrorists, and certainly New Yorkâ€™s most wanted fugitive in respect to the horrible terror attacks of the September 11, 2001, would be on a ballot in upstate New York where the stigma of 9/11 is still strong and some scars are still raw over post 9/11 alleged â€˜crackdownsâ€™ and law enforcement scrutiny of the large Muslim-American population in communities there.â€

He further adds that the misspelling is offensive to the Democratic nominee.

â€œThatâ€™s both an insult and injury to a Senator who has earned the right to have his name spelled and put right on the ballot, even the electronic ones.â€

Finally, blogger of American Buddhist Net, writes about the $100,000 reward offered by Velvet Revolution to anyone who can prove Karl Rove and Michael Connell rigged the 2004 election.

â€œI doubt that's enough. Maybe $10 million and a really good witness protection program would get results.â€

4 comments

I am convinced that the voting machines are rigged. I’m going to vote anyway and I’m going to request a paper ballot which I don’t expect to get. I agree with Canadian Paul Bryant’s statement. I am hopeful that Obama will be elected but I will not be surprised if he does not. His loss will be blamed on racism but I have some sense that that is a red herring. I did not expect to see the destruction of this great nation in my lifetime but corruption and greed has destroyed a wonderful idea.

Thanks for quoting me, but i don’t remember claiming most of the media think voting irregularities are a conspiracy – most of them label that idea a ‘conspiracy theory’ despite the considerable evidence Greg Palast has provided for it in his books. (I wondered if maybe you’d mistyped and meant to include ‘theory’? – don’t know )He exaggerates in claiming that exit polls are ‘always reliable’ and i’ve corrected that in other posts in my blog but on the rest he’s done some serious investigative journalism of a kind that’s rare these days and the BBC as well as the Observer and Guardian newspapers have all shown his reports in the UK. These are mainstream news sources and wouldn’t associate with him if he was just a conspiracy theorist.